DPReview recommends: Best smartphone cameras

DPReview recommends: Best smartphone cameras

In many users' pockets consumer-level digital compact cameras have been replaced by smartphones. The cameras of the latter don't usually have zoom lenses or xenon flashes but image sensor technology has been rapidly improving and clever software processing helps rival, and in some cases even surpass, image quality of dedicated cameras. Add large high-resolution screens for image framing and viewing along with the ability to add special features and new shooting modes by installing apps to the mix, and it's no surprise that for many the smartphone camera has become an important piece of photographic equipment.

On this page we have listed, in no particular order, our current favorite smartphone cameras for those who are looking to buy their first smartphone or upgrade their current device. We are aiming to continuously update this article as new reviews are being added to the site. At the bottom of the page you will also find a chronological list of all smartphone camera reviews that have been published on DPReview Connect since we started the site in 2012.

Recommendations are subject to change and current as of December 2015. Please note that some reviews are ongoing and we will update this article accordingly.

In terms of smartphone technology the the Panasonic Lumix DMC-CM1 is not the newest device anymore but with its 1-inch image sensor, adjustment dial and comprehensive manual settings it is still the closest thing to a true hybrid device that we have seen. Its image detail and operational control is unheard of on more conventional smartphone cameras and the ISO range up to 25,600 allows for more flexibility when shooting in low light. Additionally the Raw files offer noticeably more editing leeway than those captured by cameras with smaller sensors.

However, CM1 owners have to be willing to accept some compromises. The lens shows some noticeable corner softness, white balance under artificial light is inconsistent and the flash produces results that can be virtually unusable. Video quality is average at best and we weren't too impressed by the CM1's screen either. The DMC-CM1 is also noticeably bulkier than conventional smartphones and as shipped, the lens has no protection from scratching, so carrying the device in your pocket might not be ideal.

Essentially, the Panasonic CM1 is the device of choice for all those who want their smartphone to offer the looks, feel, control and image detail of a premium compact camera. If you are willing to accept the drawbacks mentioned above and don't mind paying a premium price it won't be easy to find a smartphone that performs better as a stills camera.

In our opinion the Galaxy S6 and S6 Edge are the nicest looking-looking and made Samsung smartphones we have tested so far and the camera performance perfectly matches the premium look and feel of the exterior.

With their 16MP CMOS sensors the Samsung flagship models capture good detail in bright light and thanks to a combination of very well balanced noise reduction, a fast F1.9 aperture and optical image stabilization low light image quality is at the very top of smartphone cameras with small sensors. In addition both panorama and HDR modes produce great results and the front camera is among the best we have seen. The 5.1-inch Quad-HD screen is fantastic for viewing images or composition, even in bright outdoor conditions, and the new Quick Launch feature gives rapid access to the redesigned and better-structured camera app via a double-click of the home button.

There aren't many points of criticism but high volume photographers will notice the lack of a microSD slot. Thanks to a firmware update the Galaxy now offers manual control of shutter speeds or DNG Raw capture though. So overall, as a mobile photographer you can't go wrong with the Galaxy S6 Edge. It offers great smartphone image quality and camera performance in a beautiful package, just make sure you can live without expandable storage.

What we like: Class-leading image quality in all light levels, efficient HDR and panorama modes, premium look and feel

What we don't like: no expandable storage

Also consider: The LG G4 comes with a spec sheet that is not too dissimilar to the Galaxy S6's. It combines a 16MP CMOS sensor with an even faster F1.8 aperture and optical image stabilization. We preferred the Samsung's build quality and screen and found the Galaxy also had a slight edge in terms of image and video quality. However, the G4 is still very good and adds a microSD slot and removable battery to the mix, making it an excellent alternative for the users who rely on those features.

The value for money option: Motorola Moto X Style / Pure Edition

The Motorola Moto X Style (Moto X Pure Edition in the US) offers a high-end specification at a price point that is noticeably lower than the competition from other established manufacturers. It offers good image and video quality across the board. In very low light optical image stabilization could help reduce the need for shooting at high ISOs but but even without such a system digital stabilization is doing a very good job in video mode and still images show well balanced processing up to the highest sensitivities. The front camera is one of the first we have seen to come with a dedicated LED-flash, giving the Moto an advantage when shooting self-portraits in very low light.

Images are composed and viewed on a large high-resolution display that is sharp and bright, allowing for decent visibility even when shooting in sunny conditions. All the technology is wrapped up in a solidly built water repellent body, allowing for use in adverse weather conditions.

On the software side of things, purists will appreciate the Moto X Style's operating system, which is very close to stock Android. Despite the latest version of Google's mobile operating system the Moto X Style does not support DNG Raw capture or full manual control over shutter speed and ISO though. Panorama mode cannot keep up with the best in class but if you are happy to expand the imaging feature set via third-party options from Google Play and can live without Raw, the Motorola Moto X Style currently represents one of the best value for money handsets for mobile photographers in the high-end bracket of the market.

What we don't like: no DNG Raw support, low-quality panoramas and slow-motion video

Also consider: The Motorola Moto X Play comes with a very similar design to the Moto X Style but a smaller 5.5-inch 1080p display and a slightly downgraded processor specification. In terms of camera module and operating system it's very similar to the Style, albeit at an even more affordable price, making it a great option for the budget-conscious mobile photographer.

Like its predecessors the iPhone 6s Plus delivers solid image quality with good exposure, color and tonality across all light levels but, especially in bright conditions, pixel-level detail is not quite up with the best in class. Where the Apple device really shines is in the special modes department though. Panorama mode produces the largest and best-stitched images in the smartphone sector and both slow-motion and standard video modes capture excellent results. Finally there's now also 4K video for those who need higher resolution moving images.

Apple has also upgraded the front cam to a 5MP sensor and the iOS ecosystem arguably still offers the best selection in imaging and video apps. For current iPhone 6 or 6 Plus users upgrading to the 's' model offers limited benefits but the iPhone remains a solid choice for any mobile photographer, especially when they're already invested into the iOS operating system.

What we like: Good exposure and color, great video and panorama modes, premium materials

What we don't like: less pixel-level detail than direct competitors, no microSD-slot

Also consider: The iPhone 6s offers most of the Plus model's imaging features and quality in a smaller package with 4.7-inch screen. The camera module has to make do without optical image stabilization but in its testing DxOMark found the impact on image quality to be small.

If none of our recommendations can convince you, below you can see a complete list of our smartphone camera reviews including scores. Click on the device name to go straight to the review.

Comments

Good point there vv50.Few days on and its only getting better....the camera that is, I'm a photographer and use the mobile as a go anywhere anytime using it often to ' scout' for likely images.Going to be interesting to see how it reviews by the paid for comment brigade.

I have been using a Galaxy S6 for two days now, lets see you review THIS camera under the iPhone!

Reading through the posts it MUST be an embarrassment to DPReview to have a banner "DPReview recommends: best smartphone camera" then have to post not once but repeatedly ...sorry we have not tested that one yet......

"lets see you review THIS camera under the iPhone!" - why do you assume that S6 needs to be in the same category as the iPhone? do you really think you want the S6 to fall under "best for general shooting" which does not even emphasize image quality?

Cross your fingers that this will be updated once they get hold of the Galaxy S6, Note 4 and CM1 again for their so-called proper testing. Wonder if that "Best in General" criteria will still be awarded for iPhone. =D

Just so he can say something nice about the iPhone (and he really has to put it as first). In the blind test conducted over PhoneArena, iCrap 6 came out last. I think we can consider this report as personal opinion of the author and should be taken seriously at all.

"In the blind test conducted over PhoneArena, iCrap 6 came out last" - right, because you (blindly) trust the judgment of anonymous readers, and you always pick your camera based on image quality tests over actual use.

It is obvious that the results here are pure preference/opinion-based and does not match with actual (tons) of results outside DPR. Show us a side-by-side comparison that iPhone is better in IQ than any other phone out there? Here what do you see? random numbers with no supporting evidence? Over there they have provided the readers with actual shots compared side by side.

can you please quote at what point did anyone from DPR claim that "iPhone is better in IQ than any phone out there"?

"random numbers with no supporting evidence" - no, that's how you choose to interpret it

"Over there they have provided the readers with actual shots" - and instead of trusting one site's opinion, you think it's better to trust another site's survey of opinions of thousands you don't know, without any clue on what their preferences are.

if the tomato industry conducts a blind tomato sauce test, you're saying that you simply agree with the majority's selection of brand Z over brand X or Y, without any understanding of how the tomato sauce was set up, or even considering how different each person prefers to use their tomato sauce over you?

You know Mister Roboto is just a troll when he cannot even address the phones being reviewed properly.

Samsung has been paying and cultivating a trolling squad to attack Apple and LG for a while now and it is one reason why I don't trust anonymous reviews be it on YouTube or internet forums. It is either professional review or nothing.

There is no trolling involved in the blind tests.=> defenders of iPhone fall short of arguments.I'm slowly starting to hate iPhones & the defendersGOOD JOB !!You're Real Trolls = making Apple a bad...apple :-(

LOL, only an Apple fanboy can be so detached from reality as to claim that cameras should not be picked up because of their image quality. Says the person who picks up a phone only because it has a particular logo. PRICELESS.

Apple sell their products based on the idea that the buyer is joining an elite club. It shouldn't be a surprise that once someone has joined the Apple cult he or she starts to see any of the "heretics" who dare to use another brand as "low-class people" lacking any taste.

So, this is a marketing strategy that works fantastically with idiots who want to feel superior to the rest of humanity, but it also backfires majestically, as the elitist and racist Apple fanboy sooner or later ticks a lot of people off. And then people wise up and realize that it's Apple who actually created that monster.

I have a Galaxy Note 4 and my son bought a iPhone 6+ the same day. In the daytime my Note 4 is definitely better than the Apple but in low light I have to admit the Apple is better.

But for web use, emails, Facebook they both are way more than is needed. I bought the Galaxy mostly for the 4k video which is pretty amazing and the 8mp frame grabs are as good as his Apple in good light. YMMV.

I too find it beyond belief that the ratings for the iPhone 6 camera is so high. No amount of majik is going to get that sensor to outperform itself, and it doesn't.I am reluctant to call bias, or worse....for the record I currently use Apple, Sony and Samsung smartphones/ cameras.Also for the record, I do not follow brand, I simply want the convenience of having a reliable camera /phone handy at all times. It really galls when a person follows a site like this and finds it leads up the proverbial "garden path'...to no better not even average.

You know what's really funny? Despite the Galaxy S6 having a massively better camera than the iPhone 6, what I've read so far from Apple-worshiping American tech "journalists" is something like "the performance is about equal to that of the iPhone 6 camera."

What? Are you kidding me? I mean, this pure theater of the absurd. One has an 8mp 2012 Sony camera module and the other has a brand-new 16mp 2015 Sony chip. Sony must be laughing their a$$es off, since the old 8mp chip is the same now used by budget Android phones (where do you think Apple's massive profits come from? Maybe from buying old and mediocre components at bargain prices and selling their devices at ridiculously high prices?)

But then again, these are the same people who trashed the Moto 360 on its "poor" 30-hour battery and then later claimed that the Apple Watch's 18-hour battery is more than sufficient. They also wrote that Android Wear is an "Apple Watch copycat." Apparently Google has invented the time-machine...

There is so much more to the picture qualilty than just a 8 or 16mp sensor. Resolution of the lens, processing etc. But still people are stuck in pixel peeping and arguments like 16Mp is better that 8mp so it must be better.

Why do you think the Iphone 5S has a lower Dxo score than the Iphone6, although it has the same sensor ?

I'm sorry, but the S6 has a better camera than the iPhone, in every respect. That's what you get from serious tech journalists who don't belong to the Apple cult, like 99% of the American tech media. And no, Apple doesn't make lenses, they buy the cheapest ones, because they know no one would dare to criticize them. At least not in the US.

Now you act just like all the people you accuse of being part of Apple Cult. I did not even mention the S6 and still you keep defending it. Like the so hated Apple fan boy.I just pointed out that with the same sensor you can get different results. But you dismiss this part by presenting non factual information and feelings that Samsung is not treated fairly.

The iPhone 6 uses a 2012 Sony camera module, the same used by low-cost Android phones in 2015. Meanwhile Sony have moved to their new 16-mp module, which is featured in the best phones on the market. And yet somehow you know better than Sony engineers, because it's just impossible for you to accept that Apple sells you old parts. And of course you believe that Apple's gargantuan profits come from magic, not from buying the cheapest crap and selling it to the highest price...

So you like carrying around a extra device yo overcome the crippling Apple deliberately does to their devices.....".?But I am intrigued ... Can mobile lite do everything a simple USB flash drive can in Windows and Android .... If so I might buy on and actually start using my ipad

And the 1520/930 also beat them all hands down currently. Yes I'm biased to the natural looking pictures that Nokias make but I can enhance those if I want to. With Lumia Camera 5 and Lumia Camera Classic installed I can choose natural/enhance by app too. Also, only Nokias and Sonys seem to bother with dedicated camera buttons anymore.

*Inset obligatory whinge about another 'favourite device' being absent*

On a more serious note, it'll be interesting to see how good the S6 is, my G2 is already too big and I have zero interest in an even larger phone. It's good to see a 'smaller' phone other than an LG with OIS, I don't think people realise how much difference it makes to indoor photography when you're lumbered with a tiny sensor and a craptacular plastic lens.

Why would you recommend a smartphone with mediocre IQ (worst versus Nokia, Samsung and Panasonic) the best for general shooting? And why so dependent on imaginary DXO scores? Show us real test images comparison not just virtual graphs.

The simple fact that you think that anyone opposing the ongoing Apple's brainwashing by having commentators, analysts and "testers" hypnotized is a "hater" says a lot about the cult-vector for the whole thing.

What are going to call us next?..."Supressives"...?

If you still have a modicum of free thinking please tell me:

Do you feel it is OK to differentiate a less-specified device the way it was on this article, just so it can lead an arbitrary category - "Best for General Shooting" (...they are ALL for general shooting....they're smartphones...!...) - and so it can then be put at the top of the article?

Don't you find it a an extreme coincidence that the proclaimed "no particular order" ends up starting with an Apple product?

Don't you think that it would be logical to start with the best overall product in the category the Lars decided to name "Best for Raw shooting and editing"?

While I agree the cameras of iPhones are far from being cr@ppy, the cameras of the Note4, the 808, the 1020 etc. are _all_ able to produce higher-detailed and/or less noisy images than that of any iPhone when operated by a knowledgeable user.

The G3 is probably too old to be relevant for review now, I guess. The newer LGs have the same IQ as the G2 anyway (I have a G2, my partner has a G3, I'm pretty sure they use the same sensor/lens stack) although of the newer phones have dual-tone flash and laser AF (which is fast, but pretty hit & miss.)

The G3 is a POS though, it's laggy as hell (though better with Cyanogenmod), the battery life took a massive nosedive and the screen is awful compared to the G2.

For Android, the only two broadly available phones I would consider are Note 4 and Galaxy S6. Other Android OEMs for some reason still don't care much about processing like Samsung before S4 and all the photos are low quality.

For Microsoft, I have no idea what they are doing. They abandoned high end markets to focus on mid and low-range phones leaving 930 a minor upgrade over 920/925 and 1520 as holdover from 2013.

Microsoft is doing pretty well in mid-end phones and reasonably well in high-end phones. There are construction issues, like loose physical buttons or badly installed internal mics. BUT you usually will be able to return your defective device and get a non-defective unit.

When you get a fully working unit, they're awesome phones. Even in the low end you get better audio capture than in the iPhone 6. I record my band at studio with my L930 without distortions, something that our bassist can't with his iPhone 6.

The DNG capture is also nice feature. The bad thing is that I can't copy the files easily (i.e. through USB) to my Mac, so I have to attach the device to my Windows 8 VM or send the files to the cloud.

Microsoft is also doing a good job on providing offline content like radios (up to four) and maps. I can't see a good reason for having an iPhone... Even AirDrop, an Apple-only feature, doesn't work when I try to transfer files from my wife's iPhone to our Macs.

I See you didn't use the current LG Phone but an older one. I have the LG G3 with a 13MP camera. I have taken some great pix. I was rather surprised that you used the older version over the current version.

two things is interesting in this:1, there are phones quite old and there are no very new ones2, the difference in some scores between the dpr and dxo results (Nokia phones ;) )anyway on phonearena the winner of the recent blind camera test is Lumia 930

I have and use the iphone 6 and the Note 4. Samsung for everyday/work and iphone as second contact phone and for weekends. The Note 4 is clearly the best for pictures and video. The iphone lags beyond but takes fantastic panoramas and sometimes gives you more natural colours. Problem is the Note is sometimes awkward to use and always requires two hands to get sharp pictures even with ois. But when you manage to keep it steady it provides clearly better results than the iphone. My wife has the 6+ and despite the ois it has the same problems of stability as the Note. So, in my opinion, it's the iphone for panoramas and the Note for everything else (provided you can keep it steady). Maybe the S6 will be the best of both worlds. BTW: my RX 100 smokes all of the above and it's not much more difficult to carry than the Note 4 or 6+!

My old Pana LX3 smokes any modern smartphone, even the 808 Pureview (the benchmark in still pictures). However, I think Nokia 930 and 1520 are the current winners. As a bonus, you get HDR audio capture, that is, you can record a black metal concert without being annoyed with unwanted distortions (you'll only get the wanted distortion from the guitars :P).

"My old Pana LX3 smokes any modern smartphone, even the 808 Pureview (the benchmark in still pictures). However, I think Nokia 930 and 1520 are the current winners. As a bonus, you get HDR audio capture, that is, you can record a black metal concert without being annoyed with unwanted distortions (you'll only get the wanted distortion from the guitars :P)."

Agreed. I've made 1:1 tests with the Note4 and the 808 in a loud concert. The Note4 did distort; the 808 didn't. Of course, the OIS helped the image of the note4 a LOT.

hmm I used to own an LX3, and it did not even get close to smoking my 808. In good light, there is no competing against the 41MP sensor. In low light, the LX3 was exceptionally noisy at any ISO above 200.

The feature I liked best from the LX3 was the CCD type sensor. This made for exceptional video quality for fast panning video capturing as there would be absolutely NO rolling shutter of jello effect. Sadly though when capturing video the zoom and AF is disabled, so essentially you have to prefix your focus and zoom focal length before you start recording.

So you are not giving a note 4 to me?Darn, im still using my galaxy s2, both the new iphone and samsung galaxy S6 are over 1000$ in my country.This S2 will be used til death does us apart :pthrow 1000$ into a great lens?Sure, throw it into a phone? God no.

Seriously?! Where's the Note 4? Which has in other reviews been touted as better than the iPhone 6 and Nexus. How can you create an article called, "Best Smartphone Cameras" and leave out a leading contender? That's like reviewing the "Best DSLR Cameras" and leaving out Canon and/or Nikon.I suspect the article writer is biased to Apple. A low for DPreview. Wow.

It's actually been very hard to get hold of. We finally got one here in Seattle, a few days ago (and we're continuing to publish sample images from it on dpreview.com) but Panasonic Europe has yet to supply one to Lars for a review. But we're working on it!

we can only recommend the devices we have tested and with the speed manufacturers are releasing smartphones these days we will arguably never be in a situation where everything has been tested. Note 4 is in the works and CM1 should follow soon afterwards. Vibe Shot is very much a niche device and not available in many major markets, so I won't promise a review of that one. Btw devices being announced does not mean that reviewable units with final firmware are available. The majority of 24 hours after launch "reviews" you find on many gadget sites are done on pre-production devices that can have all sorts of issues.

I picked up a Nikon D5000/18-55mm kit for only $175 around two weeks ago, it even included a portrait grip, 2 spare batteries, a Toshiba case and a 4G card. It would totally blast any of these to pieces. Yes it's large--so? When you care about quality, you only use the good stuff, not the stuff the Kodak/Polaroid crowd is using. Besides, if you can't deal with an SLR, there's always a Sony RX100 or Panasonic LX100, or the Sony NEX-6 which I also have and which, with Wi-Fi, can beam your images to a device for instant sharing, if that really matters so much.

This is not an article about owning Full Frame, Crop Sensor, compact cameras, no it is about Camera Phones. Stating that the regular cameras are better is like saying that a Corvette will win you more races than a Honda Civic, duh.

Not everyone has a camera with them at all times, but most have a smart phone with them. That is what this article is for.

You can slip any of these phones into your pants pockets and forget about them. Then take them out and take pics, and upload pics instantly (no need for transfer), then proceed to look up restaurant information and to make a reservation using open table.. then call your parents to say hi.

Other than the pics, which of those can you do with the D5000? or even the RX100?

I recently picked up a Nikon Coolpix A for $329. The IQ is astounding, jaw dropping. It isn't much bigger than a cell phone. If you can live with 18mm on DX - and you care about IQ better than just about any DX combo you can get anywhere else - this is the ticket.

Exactly (brownie314). I'm well aware of what other things smartphones can do, I have a 6" one in fact. However I still take a camera of some sort with me practically always because its image quality is superior. Instant uploading won't matter when you're looking at them later, whereas the better quality will.

"... to recognize an SLR's superior image quality" - you assume that people think their smartphones have superior image quality than SLRs?

"and possess the dedication to almost always have it on them, or at least an RX100 type" - so your argument is don't compromise with a smartphone? in that case, you're also saying one should possess the dedication to always also carry a laptop, since it has a superior screen, cpu and keyboard compared to a smartphone.

w50 - I don't know about a D5000, but a Coolpix A is actually smaller than my current cell phone. What does it have to do with this article - nothing - I was responding to the D5000 guy. But thanks for being the local police.

Incomplete test without the Samsung Note 4.Also, the LG G2 and LG G3 can shoot Raw (DNG) with an app XCam LG.The Note 4 and LG G3 can save pictures on microSD cards and the battery can be swapped. Just like dedicated cameras.

if you read carefully you will see that the Note 4 is indeed mentioned in this article. I am also currently working a full review. By the way this is not a "test" but a summary of our current state of play in terms of smartphone cameras and, as stated at the beginning of the article, will be updated as new reviews are published. But you seem to know what's best already, so probably would not be interested anyway :)

Yes I saw that, but is kind of lame that at this point the Note 4 hasn't been tested as well as other notables mobile devices.It feels kind of biased when Apple release a new phone and sure enough the preview, review and "x" photographer experience are posted.I appreciate the time you guys put on this site, but as i said it feels that more key mobile devices need to be compared for a more balanced perspective on what is on the market these days.

I completely agree. Not including the Samsung Note 4 when it's been widely known, evaluated, and found to be excellent by this time is weak, to be generous. I own one and can tell you the image quality is simply excellent for a phone camera. What makes this all the stranger is that the Note II (!!!) IS included in the list when it has already been superceded by TWO models of the Note.

correct me if I am wrong but I can't remember we published an iPhone 6 preview or photographer's experience. I am pretty sure I would remember that. The only reason the Note 4 has not been reviewed yet is, apart from Samsung not really being too forthcoming with their test devices, limited resource. If I'd reviewed the Note 4 one of the other reviews would not have been done and I am not sure which one that should have been. But it certainly also easier to review a device you actually have. In any case, as I said I am working on it right now, can only do one at a a time really :)

I think it was on the news section, and also the iPhone kind of shows more prominently than others on the Connect site.Anyways, I'm glad you are finally working on the Note 4 review and thanks for being open about it and taking the time to reply.

What? The LG G3 can do things better than the iPhone 6+.The G3 can shoot Raw, it has better OIS, you can tweak manually almost any setting, shoot 4K video. Store images/videos on microSD cards, it has higher resolution, etc, etc.By the way the LG G3 was awarded best Smarphone of 2014 in the 2015 Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.

It's been a while now, since I've been using LG-G3. It 's LG=D855. I am using Camera FV-5, which otherwise have RAW shooting support. But it says LG G3 doesn't have RAW support. It does have better leg lifted in some areas, but the iPhone definitely sits better when it comes to SLO-MO, low light photography.

For what it's worth, I think it is a good well rounded review. Although I am a self confessed Apple fan I don't think there is a bad phone camera and the products are pretty close, swings and roundabouts and personal preference.

"Thanks for your feedback. Would love to hear what specifically makes it so negative."

Simply, the best currently available camera phones are absent from an article about the "best camera phones".

Phonearena and similar mobile focused sites have covered this ground extensively. It would have been worthwhile to see dpr using more rigorous testing methodologies to bring something new to this space.

The cameras are out there, the review are out there. If you folks couldn't thoroughly test the phones you shouldn't have bothered with the article until you could.

As is this reads like an introductory to camera phones for people that don't know their phones have cameras. Or worse..

I am extremely impressed with image quality of Note 4 (set aside 4K video and other features). In the past I avoided taking picture with my phone but now if I have my Note 4 with me, in many situations, I don't mind leaving my DSLRs at home.I got Iphone 6 for my daughter and based on visual comparison of image quality, Note 4 is clearly the better one.

"I got Iphone 6 for my daughter and based on visual comparison of image quality, Note 4 is clearly the better one."

Well, while I don't necessarily agree with regards to the stock Camera app (particularly WRT panoramas, in which the iPhone *is* somewhat better), the Note4 delivers *significantly* better images if you use ways to circumvent the VERY strong noise reduction and oversharpening practically ruining the images produced by the stock Camera app.

If you have a Snapdragon 805-based Note4 (Exynos users don't need to apply, regretfully), you can save (WRT noise reduction and sharpening) almost-RAW still images (and non-tampered videos) via the third-party app "Snap camera HDR". I've dedicated several articles to shooting with the (again, Snapdragon 805-based) Note4 here in the DPR Android forums ( www.dpreview.com/forums/2004 ) and over at XDA-Devs; anyone interested in getting the best results from his/her Note4 may want to check them out.

I'll say it again, but probably for the last time :) If you actually read the article you will see that it is not omitted but listed under "also consider" below the Galaxy S5. Other than that I am currently working on a full Note 4 review and will update this article accordingly when finished.

I am very interested in the Note 4, because it has a fantastic large display. I think on a smartphone the size and quality of the display is a major factor to consider. Because one of the reasons I would buy one is to have my photos with me all the time for show & tell purposes. So you might consider weighting display quality into your assessment of value with a stronger factor. Also the possibility of using the smartphone for RC and tethering with other equipment is a very big deal for a lot of people I think. I know that it will be for me.

OnePlus One should be on that list: ability to save RAW files in DNG format along with JPEGs, quite good auto white balance. Only issue I have with it is somewhat slow focusing that seems to sometimes lag behind the shutter.

it is kind of a nice device though and these days by far the only one that is capable of doing Raw. Once they are more widely available we'll certainly have a closer look at the OnePlus devices as they are very interesting, but for now we'll have to focus on what's more widely available.

It has by far the lowest usable resolution among flagship devices, minus the (about to be replaced) One M8.

That is a weakness in reasonable to good light, not just because it limits output size, but also because you have much less room for cropping, which is the only savior to somewhat compensate for the obvious lack of optical zoom on these cameras.

I wasn't talking about megapixels, I was talking about usable detail. I probably should have limited my claim to the largest/more well known vendors, but some of the top Chinese Vendors (Oppo, Meizu, Xiaomi, Lenovo), Nokia/Microsoft, Motorolla, Samsung, LG and even Sony (if you go "manual" mode) do better in this regard these days with the Z3, despite subpar processing.

well, I have tested both the Z3 and 6 Plus extensively, and the Apple is much better in literally every image quality related aspect. I think the samples in our comprehensive reviews show that pretty nicely. The Sony is good example for how 20MP aren't really very useful when combined with subpar processing and average quality lenses.

In terms of cropping power to somewhat offset the lack of optical zoom, you're talking about center cropping. In 20MP mode on the Sony, the iPhone really falls short in terms of usable detail when going for the same object magnification, despite an actual longer focal length of the lens (29mm vs 25mm IIRC).

I didn't say the iPhone 6 Plus has the weaker camera because of less pixels (there are many factors to consider what's best for you, some of them being subjective), I just pointed out that it does have a clear weakness, contrary to the claim in the article.

"it "only" has 8 megapixels, but for some reason Apple gets more detail out of those 8MP than many phones with much higher pixel counts. And its detail that counts, not pixels."

Too bad it's not possible to avoid the iPhone applying noise reduction. While it's not as devastating as the NR applied by the stock Camera app in the Samsung S5 and the Note4, it's still the most important thing having a VERY bad effect on the overall IQ if you also factor in desktop PP'ing your images.

If you do PP your images, the (Snap805-based) Note4, shooting using the right tools (currently, "Snap camera HDR" only) with the right settings (0 sharpening, Samsung camera mode enabled, no NR), certainly produces (on the whole, after downsampling to 8 Mpixels) better-detailed images than any iPhones.

It's a big letdown on Apple's part not to give us RAW support to (at least) avoid the NR.

Apple has a hard time learning that lesson. It got rid of the "classic" iPod, with a good sound card.

And the new MacBooks have only a slightly better sound card than the older ones.

iTunes, the software, is still horrid for sound quality, no matter the audio file type. JRiver is far far better, and VLC is also a good bit better at audio playback on Mac hardware. (Yes the iMac has a much better sound card than MacBooks.)

The point of all this, if Apple can't learn that it's losing MacBook sales because of bad sound cards--and also the fact that the battery is glued inside a case most can't open--Apple is not going to learn to make raw an option on the iPhone.

(Too bad that Samsung went for a glued in battery on the Galaxy S6. Irony: the iPhone 6 doesn't glue the battery in, though uses stupid screws still.)

well, not sure what the problem is, we will of course include the S6 in this list once we have reviewed it and we like it but for now we don't really have a good idea what its camera is like. New devices are launched all the time, so from this point of view there is never a perfect time for doing an article like this.

No, the point is not waiting just a little bit for the S6 while knowing its specs are improved over the already very highly rated Note4 (which also quite frankly crazily is not included) is akin to Car & Driver publishing a comparison test of mid-size cars and not including the class leading Accord on the very eve of its new model intro.

And, yes, resources or not, when every other major smartphone website touts the Note 4 as equal or superior to the iPhone 6Plus, time to put other activities aside and test it as well to stay relevant.

BTW, I use a 2014 MotoX (which I did not get for its camera :-) ), so no axe to grind here, just stating the obvious.

Interesting. The pics and video from the Sony Xperia Z3 are so bad that I'm inclined to distrust the DxO results. Better than the iphone 5?!?! Are they out of their minds? Objective tests be damned. Just look at the pics. I've downsampled to a width of 2500 and the Z3 isn't just mush rather it's soup, where the iphone 5 (and 5s) is just fine (both at ISO50). Yet the iphone has a lower rating?!?!?!

DxO has long been known as an ineffective evaluator to people for a some time. Their lab methods are fine. It's their misshapen priority ranking of one criteria over another that sways the final score. Look that the DPR ratings vs the DxO rating. Its obvious that the author here doesn't agree either.

The LG G4 follows on last year's G3, and like its predecessor puts a lot of emphasis on camera specification. The 16MP 1/2.6-inch CMOS sensor is a touch larger than the 1/3-inch sensors in many other phones, and the F1.8 aperture is the fastest among the current crop of high-end mobile devices. We put its mobile imaging capabilities to the test. Read more

Latest in-depth reviews

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.

Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.

The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

We spoke to wildfire photographer Stuart Palley about his experiences shooting the recent Woolsey fire, why the Nikon Z7 isn't quite ready to take a permanent spot in his gear bag, and 'that' Tweet from Donald Trump.

The Z7 presented Nikon with a stiff challenge: how to build a mirrorless camera that measures up to its own DSLRs and can deliver a familiar experience to Nikon users. Chris and Jordan tell us whether they think Nikon succeeded.

Nikon has released firmware version 1.02 that resolves a flickering issue when scrolling through images, an ISO limitation problem, and an occasional crash that could occur when displaying certain Raw files.

The Insta360 One X is the company's latest consumer 360-degree camera, supporting 5.7K video, including excellent image stabilization, as well as 18MP photos. And, in our experience, it's a really fun camera to use.